Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-09-2009, 12:32 PM
 
Location: NOCO
532 posts, read 1,568,189 times
Reputation: 237

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by delta07 View Post
This doesn't make sense. Lodgepole grow where they do because they are "in their element." These forests have been here much longer than the humans that have lived or intervened. You cannot remove the species without some detrimental consequence to the ecosystem. They are adapted well, and planting some other species where lodgepole naturally grow, will not work. First off, most other species can't survive where lodgepole can. There is a reason why the stands grow the way they do. Second, what do you think would be accomplished by doing this? Having a pretty forest. Why would you want to change this? I don't get it!
Yea, Lodgepoles are prety hardy, they are known to have a range from about baja California to the Yukon Territory, and from the west coast, about to the black hills. The problem isn't necessarily the lodgepoles themselves, in a wild forest, the mountain pine beetle isn't 'that' big of an issue, they come in and kill the older, past-vigorous stage trees that can't defend themselves, making room for some new saplings to come up. That's under non epidemic conditions and we're in an epidemic, where they will try to prey on anything with a trunk < ~6 inches.

The lodgepole in many places being affected by the epidemic are there, in general, because that are had been clear cut, or cleared quickly in some fashion. Thus, you'll find entire forests of aging (becoming vulnerable) lodgepole pines, that aren't spaced very well (crowded, weaker) and have had their natural fire cycles suppressed(No old, weak, vulnerable trees being cleared to make room for new ones). This makes it possible for an epidemic of such a magnitude we're experiencing now to take place. I'm not saying lodgepole is bad and they should be replaced with other trees, when a lodgepole pine forest is wild, it looks much different, and cycles much more smoothly. I'm suggesting that a little diversity gets mixed in. Biodiversity increases a forests tolerance for change, makes it more durable. Also, I'm suggesting that this is allowed to happen again, by producing another forest of crowded, aging, weak, lodgepoles to be another disaster in 80 or so years. That's what I'm saying. I don't care about how a forest works, I care about how it operates cyclically, and by allowing the same thing to happen again for the next generation due to mismanagement or shortsightedness would be irresponsible.

Also, these forests aren't very old, there might be some people alive today that might have had a hand in this situation becoming what it is. These forests are a product of the mismanagement that has preceded them.

To be honest the MPB epidemic is in some ways a perfect storm, there has been 'natural' phenomenon taking place as well. Theres been a trend of not-so-advantageous years that have weakened the trees, with lower precipitation reducing the amount of defensive resin the trees produce, higher temperatures, etc. In general, it doesn't get cold enough in Colorado to REALLY kill the things off, you need sustained temperatures of -25 F for a number of days to kill about 1/4 of the population, and in the study I was looking at in Fraser, there weren't too many strings of -25f.

In the end, I'm saying manage it correctly, manage it with an eye towards the future. Don't do anything unnatural, either by replacing lodgepole, or letting lodgepole to get out of hand, either.

Hoo yah?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-09-2009, 01:33 PM
 
Location: Bend, OR
3,296 posts, read 9,691,394 times
Reputation: 3343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ticky909 View Post
Yea, Lodgepoles are prety hardy, they are known to have a range from about baja California to the Yukon Territory, and from the west coast, about to the black hills. The problem isn't necessarily the lodgepoles themselves, in a wild forest, the mountain pine beetle isn't 'that' big of an issue, they come in and kill the older, past-vigorous stage trees that can't defend themselves, making room for some new saplings to come up. That's under non epidemic conditions and we're in an epidemic, where they will try to prey on anything with a trunk < ~6 inches.

The lodgepole in many places being affected by the epidemic are there, in general, because that are had been clear cut, or cleared quickly in some fashion. Thus, you'll find entire forests of aging (becoming vulnerable) lodgepole pines, that aren't spaced very well (crowded, weaker) and have had their natural fire cycles suppressed(No old, weak, vulnerable trees being cleared to make room for new ones). This makes it possible for an epidemic of such a magnitude we're experiencing now to take place. I'm not saying lodgepole is bad and they should be replaced with other trees, when a lodgepole pine forest is wild, it looks much different, and cycles much more smoothly. I'm suggesting that a little diversity gets mixed in. Biodiversity increases a forests tolerance for change, makes it more durable. Also, I'm suggesting that this is allowed to happen again, by producing another forest of crowded, aging, weak, lodgepoles to be another disaster in 80 or so years. That's what I'm saying. I don't care about how a forest works, I care about how it operates cyclically, and by allowing the same thing to happen again for the next generation due to mismanagement or shortsightedness would be irresponsible.

Also, these forests aren't very old, there might be some people alive today that might have had a hand in this situation becoming what it is. These forests are a product of the mismanagement that has preceded them.

To be honest the MPB epidemic is in some ways a perfect storm, there has been 'natural' phenomenon taking place as well. Theres been a trend of not-so-advantageous years that have weakened the trees, with lower precipitation reducing the amount of defensive resin the trees produce, higher temperatures, etc. In general, it doesn't get cold enough in Colorado to REALLY kill the things off, you need sustained temperatures of -25 F for a number of days to kill about 1/4 of the population, and in the study I was looking at in Fraser, there weren't too many strings of -25f.

In the end, I'm saying manage it correctly, manage it with an eye towards the future. Don't do anything unnatural, either by replacing lodgepole, or letting lodgepole to get out of hand, either.

Hoo yah?
That's makes much more sense! Sorry, I just didn't read into your post correctly. I'm a professionally trained forester, although not practicing currently. So, I understand perfectly what you mean by the lack of diversity in a lodgepole stand. Thanks for the clarification! Oh, and yes, the perfect storm is brewin'. We'll just have to wait and see how it plays out!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2009, 01:55 PM
 
2,437 posts, read 8,185,601 times
Reputation: 1532
Quote:
Originally Posted by delta07 View Post
I'm a professionally trained forester, although not practicing currently.
What, exactly, does a pro forester do?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2009, 02:02 PM
 
Location: Wherabouts Unknown!
7,841 posts, read 19,002,722 times
Reputation: 9586
I think a proforester is like a professor, but they teach trees instead of people!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2009, 05:43 PM
 
Location: Bend, OR
3,296 posts, read 9,691,394 times
Reputation: 3343
Quote:
Originally Posted by treedonkey View Post
What, exactly, does a pro forester do?
As a professional forester, I worked for the US Forest Service designing, laying out, and overseeing timber harvests on Forest Service land. Other foresters deal with watersheds, recreation use, wildfires, and urban forests. Now I just take care of my family and enjoy looking at the trees!

Quote:
Originally Posted by CosmicWizard View Post
I think a proforester is like a professor, but they teach trees instead of people!
If only I could teach those dang trees not to grow where people want to built their trophy homes, eh!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2009, 08:56 PM
 
18,220 posts, read 25,865,369 times
Reputation: 53474
A professional forester? I know, said the NFL trivia machine. The poster in disguise is Bill Forester, former pro Green Bay Packer linebacker from the late 50's to mid 60's! I WIN!!!............................................ sorry.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2009, 09:02 PM
 
26,218 posts, read 49,060,172 times
Reputation: 31791
Quote:
Originally Posted by DOUBLE H View Post
A professional forester? I know, said the NFL trivia machine. The poster in disguise is Bill Forester, former pro Green Bay Packer linebacker from the late 50's to mid 60's! I WIN!!!............................................ sorry.
Having a little football withdrawl tonight, are we? Hmmm pal?
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2009, 09:21 PM
 
18,220 posts, read 25,865,369 times
Reputation: 53474
I am!! But we're cranking it up soon! Got some new Colt stories fer ya as well! Stay tuned!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2009, 10:43 PM
 
Location: Michigan
29,391 posts, read 55,609,273 times
Reputation: 22044
Post News, Colorado town's wildfire law called intrusive.

Reporting from Denver -- Until its trees started dying, the Colorado ski resort town of Breckenridge stayed out of the business of telling residents how to defend their homes against wildfire.

But with trees ravaged by a mountain pine beetle epidemic that has left large rust-tinged swaths of forest vulnerable to a catastrophic fire, town officials decided this year they had to act.

Colorado town's wildfire law called intrusive - Los Angeles Times
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2009, 08:08 AM
 
Location: Earth
1,664 posts, read 4,367,592 times
Reputation: 1624
It's really simple.

Defensible Space = you get assistance from fire agencies when the big fire comes

No Defensible Space = fend for yourself, and good luck to ya!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top